South Staffordshire Water Co. v. Sharman
Court of Queen’s Bench
2 Q.B. 44 (1896)
Facts
South Staffordshire Water Company (plaintiff) owned property that contained a pool and hired Sharman (defendant) to clean the pool. In the mud at the base of the pool Sharman found two gold rings. South Staffordshire insisted that Sharman turn over the rings, but Sharman declined and gave them instead to the police. Finding no success at locating the rings’ owners, the police eventually returned the rings to Sharman. South Staffordshire filed suit demanding the return of the rings. The lower court found that no contract existed that would expressly vest ownership rights in South Staffordshire. The court held that the precedent set forth in Bridges v. Hawkesworth, 21 L.J. Q.B. 75 (1851), applied to the facts of the case and established a right to ownership by Sharman exclusive of everyone but the true owners of the rings. South Staffordshire appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lord Russell of Killowen, C.J.)
Concurrence (Wills, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 705,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,300 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
